[Stoves] Wick Burners: Martin's Tea Time Candle Stove

[Boll, Martin Dr.]

jason marshall wrote:

I would certainly be concerned about CO from burning a large number of
candles.  But CO is not bioaccumulative.

 

[M:]

Jason, 

When I look to some pictures of people burning several candles in their
homes, -which exceed the number of ten, -I think, the amount of CO cannot be
dangerous for life -At least for up-grown -

-Remind the time the Christmas-trees were illuminated by real candles. There
was only the danger of burning in mind.

But I think it is worth to hear from CO-experts about that question.

I like the idea more to use few (one or up to 3?) tea-candles to sustain the
temperature-keeping for RHC (Retained-Heat-Cooking) than to use as a
"real"-stove.

 

Crispin wrote:

The problem for stove makers is that for a stove to be legally and safely

used indoors the amount of CO emitted as a proportion of the carbond burned

has to be under 2%.  Thus what happens in a kitchen is determined mostly be

the efficiency of the combustion (not the whole stove).  CO left unburned is

wasted heat and toxic in surprisingly small quantities.

 

I have not yet seen a working viable wax fuelled stove, though SASOL has

funded research into it as they have masses of waste waxes of various

compositions.

 

[M:]

Cripin, the RHC with (maximum 3) tea-candles which I intend most, is no
stove but just a "rechaud" (I don't know the right English word; warmer?).
And rechauds work in the simplest manner with tea-candles. 

I cannot imagine, a rechaud used with 1 to 3 tea-candles is dangerous or
forbidden. (It is not in Germany)

I do not know another heat-source (as simple), being so small to do
rechaud-work.

(I do not talk about RHC-after having brought to boil bigger amounts of food
(more than 1 to 2 kWatt necessary to bring to boil)

 

When the tea-candles could make a use of a RHC possible which would
otherwise afford (longer use of)a stove (to simmer long time), we must think
different about effectiveness.

Crispin, it is clear, these thoughts do not make sense with stoves, which
contain a lot of rest-heat after burning, to be their own RHCs. (And that
will be the normal way for greater-scale cooking as needed for more persons)

I think the calculators are asked to give a hint.

 

 

Crispin wrote:

The photo of the multi-candle stove/heater will benefit in that multiple 

metal-cored wicks could be used in a single large flat candle wich can be 

refilled I suppose.

If the metal is stainless steel, a shallow flat candle with perhaps 7 or 13 

wicks could perform quite nicely.

 

[M:] Crispin, that is a good idea, especially refilling. 

But on the other hand, with this simple way of 7 separate tea-candles, one
can reduce the power candle by candle (=wick by wick) which is difficult to
do, when the wicks are all in the same flat bowl.

 

Crispin wrote:

In my limited experience the CO emissions from candles are high...

 

[M:]Not thinking about CO I made, 30 years ago a Christmas-candle-holder for
25  1"-thick candles all in a square with 5cm distance between the candles.
It was nice to see burning and gave so much warmth in the living-room, that
we opened the window after 20 minutes. Were we saved by this action from
possible CO-intoxication? 

The flames of these candles were a lot bigger than the tea-candle flames,
and sooty.

With time the candles of the middle had to warm and lost wax.

The following Christmas we reduced to 9 candles in the same candle-holder
with more distance, which was agreeable. But I must add, our windows were in
that time not as air-tight as prescribed now by law.

I hope one can take some intoxication-information from these self-tests, but
I would be glad to hear hard CO-measuring data about normal- and
tea-candles.

 

Let us further think about wicks and wick-burning!

 

Regards

 

Martin